University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs
Center for
Studies
POLICY BRIEF
April 2012
CONNECTING THE FOOD
CYCLE IN THE URBAN CORE
Laura Ayer, University of Pittsburgh
The tendency to view food policy as a rural issue has resulted in many urban areas
taking a piecemeal approach when addressing problems within the food cycle.
Governments use planning agencies to address urban systems like housing, air, and
water in comprehensive ways. Yet food, which is so essential to life, is often missing from
the urban dialogue. The food cycle crosses both geographic and political borders and
thus should be addressed through a mechanism that breaks down these artificial
boundaries. The urban core framework provides an opportunity for intergovernmental
cooperation in addressing food policy issues.
Center for Metropolitan Studies. Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh.
Suite 3912 Wesley W. Posvar Hall, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260. [email protected]
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
CONNECTing
the food
cycle in the
urban core
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The food cycle—production,
distribution, consumption, and
waste—is an intricate system
affecting regions in different
and important ways. How
food is grown, where it comes
from, what people choose to
eat, and what happens to
food waste have implications
for the environment, health,
the economy, neighborhood
vitality, equality, and much
more.
The tendency to think of food
as a rural issue has resulted in
many urban areas taking a
piecemeal approach when
addressing problems within
the food cycle. Governments
use planning agencies to
address urban systems like
housing, air, and water in
comprehensive ways. Yet
food, which is so essential to
life, is often missing from the
urban dialogue.i
The food cycle crosses both
geographic and political
borders and thus should be
addressed through a
mechanism that breaks down
these artificial boundaries.
The Congress of Neighboring
Communities (CONNECT)
provides a platform on which
urban core issues can be
addressed. CONNECT was
created in 2009 as a forum
for collaborative leadership in
Pittsburgh’s urban core -- the
City of Pittsburgh and the 37
surrounding municipalities. The
University of Pittsburgh’s
Center for Metropolitan
Studies (CMS), which houses
CONNECT, has helped hone a
framework that advocates for
and voices the collective
interests of the urban core.ii
This policy brief offers an
overview of food problems,
and uses the CONNECT
framework to justify why the
food cycle should be
considered an integral part of
discourse within the urban core.
It also discusses macro- and
micro- level strategies for
addressing problems within the
food cycle.
Macro-level strategies provide
options for addressing the
food cycle in holistic ways. The
recommendations include:
1. Creating a forum for
continuous food discourse;
2. Conducting a comprehensive
food assessment addressing
each stage of the food cycle;
3. Creating a strategic food
plan;
integrate government system
planning with the food cycle;
5. Improve relationships
across sectors and build on
regional strengths by creating
interdisciplinary teams to
address food issues.
CONNECT works to improve
relationships across sectors and
build on regional strengths.
Governments, nonprofits, and
for-profit institutions each have
their own comparative
advantages in addressing
policy issues. Focused
coordination of their efforts
towards food policy provides
an opportunity to create
leverage and engage in
mutual learning while
addressing food problems with
a collective voice.
The policy brief provides an
overview of micro-level
initiatives that are more
tailored to specific problems or
phases of the food cycle. The
brief concludes with an analysis
of these solutions suggesting
that macro-level strategies are
a necessary component for
food reform that is
comprehensive and
sustainable, but micro-level
initiatives are needed to build
momentum and address urgent
food problems. The final
recommendation concludes that
these strategies should be used
in tandem to achieve food
reform that is both holistic and
driven.
4. Creating a Department of
Food at the local level to
1
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
PROBLEMS
Production
The production of food has
become increasingly
industrialized over the years,
having severe implications for
the environment, human health,
and local economies. The
practices of large-scale
industrialized farms rely on
heavy doses of synthetic
fertilizers, pesticides, and
herbicides, while also
consuming massive amounts of
fuel for equipment and
distribution. “Globally,
agriculture accounts for 13.5%
of greenhouse gas emissions
annually.”iii With the help of
government subsidies and
economies of scale,
concentrated large-scale
producers divert revenue from
small and mid-size regional
farmers with the potential to
generate jobs and revenue for
local economies.
Distribution
While the demand for local
food seems to be growing,
many regions lack the
necessary infrastructure to
prepare food for local
distribution. These shortfalls in
distribution networks have
contributed to increasing “food
miles.” Estimates suggest that
food travels an average of
1,500 miles before reaching
consumers—a startling trend
that threatens environmental
and local sustainability. iv
Consumption
Having access to affordable
and nutritious food is a basic
necessity that raises important
health and equity concerns.
Studies have shown that
minority neighborhoods have
significantly fewer grocery
stores than predominantly
white neighborhoods and that
minority individuals are at
greater risk for diet-related
diseases.v Other studies
suggest that, even where
grocery stores do exist, lowincome neighborhoods have
produce of lower quality than
high-income neighborhoods.vi
These food environments have
significant effects on
consumption choices and health.
Studies have also shown that
exposure to areas with a
concentration of unhealthy
food retailers, “food swamps,”
can be just as detrimental as
having low access to nutritious
food, “food deserts.”vii
Nutrition information and
education, in addition to
access, are essential
components for encouraging
healthy consumption habits.
Waste
Recycled food waste has the
potential to renew the food
cycle; but when disposed of
improperly, food waste
contributes to both economic
and environmental dilemmas.
“STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT U.S.
PER CAPITA FOOD WASTE HAS
RISEN MORE THAN
50% SINCE
1974, AND THAT WASTED FOOD
IN LANDFILLS PRODUCES
SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF
METHANE , A GAS WITH MORE
GLOBAL WARMING IMPLICATIONS
THAN CARBON .
THERE ARE ALSO
ESTIMATES THAT FOOD ACCOUNTS
FOR
12 TO 36% OF MUNICIPAL
R EDUCING OR REUSING
WASTE .
WASTE FROM FOOD CAN SAVE TAX
MONEY THROUGH REDUCED
LANDFILL COSTS AND REDUCED
EMISSIONS FROM LANDFILLS .”viii
Composting not only diverts
food waste from landfills
(reducing methane emissions
and dumping costs), it allows
food waste to be recycled into
reusable soil.
RELEVANCE FOR THE
URBAN CORE
Intergovernmental groups like
CONNECT have a unique
advantage in addressing food
issues because, like the issues
themselves, they cross artificial
boundaries. Just as food
problems cross jurisdictional
boundaries, solutions for
mitigating food problems
should be multijurisdictional.
Governments should take
interest in food system reform,
as there is potential for
economic, health, and social
benefits. Producing,
distributing, processing,
packaging, retailing,
preparing, and warehousing
food products are all parts of
the food cycle that generate
economic activity and job
creation. Further, research finds
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
an association between access
to healthy and affordable
food and rates of diet-related
diseases. From a social and
environmental standpoint,
strengthening the food cycle
within communities can
empower community residents
with more food choices, while
creating more livable
neighborhoods that are
greener and more sustainable.
Steps have been taken to
achieve these ends, but often
times the missing link in food
reform is a coordinated
approach. The urban core
should be aware of past and
present actions taken towards
food reform, and recognize
how they can be a convening
force, while also providing a
system-wide perspective that
utilizes comprehensive
planning.
“B Y PARTNERING WITH RESIDENTS ,
PRIVATE BUSINESSES , AND OTHER
NOT -FOR -PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
TO BUILD STRONGER LOCAL AND
REGIONAL FOOD SYSTEMS , LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS CAN BETTER
PREPARE COMMUNITIES FOR
CLIMATE AND ENERGY
UNCERTAINTIES , IMPROVE PUBLIC
HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY , AND CATALYZE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .”ix
STRATEGIES &
POLICY OPTIONS
There are two overarching
ways to address the problems
within the food cycle—with
macro-level strategies, and
with micro-level initiatives.
Macro-level
Strategies
Macro-level strategies for
addressing food issues are
important because they utilize
a system-wide perspective. A
limitation, however, is that they
are typically long-term and
therefore less suitable for
urgent problems. The
following section offers six
macro-level strategies to be
considered.
1) Create a forum for
continuous food
discourse
Food policy is not novel, but its
place in the policy arena has
not been stable. Changes in
governmental leadership and
the political environment often
dictate the degree to which
food is present on political
agendas. Fortunately,
platforms do exist to unite
various food stakeholders on a
continual basis. Food policy
councils (FPCs) are becoming a
more common medium for this
type of food discourse.
FPCs seek to connect the food
“silos” with coordinated action.
There are four primary
functions of FPCs: 1) discussing
food issues, 2) fostering
coordination across sectors, 3)
evaluating and influencing
policy, and 4) launching
programs to address local
needs.x
Since 2009, a group of 10 to
20 food activists have come
together to form Pittsburgh’s
Food Policy Council (PFPC).
PFPC has three primary
focuses: education, access and
advocacy. It has a variety of
members and partnerships, but
lacks political representation.
While this is not uncommon,
having a political presence
provides an opportunity to
bring government support to
grassroots initiatives, engage in
policy discussions, and assist in
food planning. Food Policy
Councils have the ability to be
a convening force. Their
position as a catalyst for
change would benefit from
further government recognition
and support.
2) Conduct a
comprehensive food
assessment
Conducting a food assessment
is a common first step for
regions wanting to address
issues within their food systems.
In 2010, the Delaware Valley
Regional Planning Commission
(DVRPC) conducted the
“Greater Philadelphia Food
System Study” and created a
subsequent Food System Plan.
Looking at Philadelphia’s urban
core and the surrounding 100mile “food shed,” DVRPC
studied the region’s agricultural
resources, food distribution,
and food economy, while also
conducting a comprehensive
food system stakeholder
analysis. The follow-up Food
System Plan offers an array of
3
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
recommendations for the
Philadelphia region, as well as
for other regions with similar
goals. Many of the
recommendations in this brief
are inspired by the DVRPC
comprehensive report.
Since February 2011, when
DVRPC released its top
recommendations for improving
the food system, they have
received a number of grants
and spearheaded key
initiatives in accordance with
their plan. In addition, DVRPC
continues to support the grant
applications of its stakeholders
while also providing technical
assistance when appropriate,
“tying individual efforts into a
regional framework.”xi
Perhaps most impressive are
the methods put in place to
collect data on a continual
basis. DVRPC created
indicators they plan to measure
annually and biannually to
maintain accountability and
provide a feedback loop for
constant improvement across
food sectors.
While a comprehensive food
system study like that of
Philadelphia’s could be a longterm goal, Community Food
Assessments (CFAs) can be a
short-term and more
manageable way to assess
regional needs and identify
the players involved.
Pothukuchi (2004) conducted a
study evaluating nine different
CFAs. The discussion proposed
the following recommendations
for regions considering a
Community Food Assessment:








Focus on the needs of lowincome residents and
marginalized populations;
Promote sustainability;
Use community as a unit of
solution;
Focus on regional assets
and strengths;
Utilize a variety of
research methods and
sources;
Examine the role of local
government;
Expand assessment beyond
one issue; and
Disseminate findings.xii
3) Create a Strategic Food
Plan
A product of DVRPC’s Greater
Philadelphia Food System
study was a municipal
implementation tool for food
system planning. Food system
planning is defined as “the
integration of food system
issues into policies, plans, and
programming at all levels of
government work.”xiii This
implementation tool can be
used to assist governments in
creating strategic food plans.
DVRPC identifies the following
components of food system
planning:






“Building partnerships and
consensus
Visioning and goal-setting
Assessments
Plan-making
Creating standards and
guidelines
Regulating and codifying



Marketing, outreach, and
education
Supporting catalytic or
pilot demonstration
projects
Targeting public
investments.”xiv
Other key recommendations
include:

“Do your homework” to
know what information
already exists, who is
involved, and to identify
where there may be gaps;

Have a clear strategy that
is goal-oriented but
feasible given limited
resources, and

Maintain accountability by
identifying who will assume
responsibility, and how
success will be measured.
This guide also identifies
common goals for food system
planning, as well as policies
and programs which have
been used to achieve these
goals.xv
4) Create a Department of
Food to integrate
government system
planning with food cycle
While there are city units
dedicated to systems such as
housing, transportation,
community development, and
health and human services, no
such parallel exists for food.
As evidenced in this report,
food markets can be subject to
market failure and do not
always meet community
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
needs—particularly
communities with low-income
and minority residents. A local
or regional Department of
Food could monitor these
troubled locations while also
offering policy
recommendations and longrange strategic plans.xvi
The food system is highly
integrated with other urban
systems. Recognizing those
relationships and creating
partnerships is another way to
address food issues in a more
comprehensive way.
Planning agencies, which are
often concerned with these
linkages, can be a good place
to start. Planning agencies
typically utilize a
comprehensive perspective,
focus on a myriad of issues,
and are concerned with the
future direction of a region—
all of which are useful ways for
thinking about the food
cycle.xvii
Other urban systems like
housing, transportation, and
community development have
clear connections to food as
well. The Community
Development Block Grant
program affords a great
opportunity to incorporate
food planning in neighborhood
planning. Transportation
solutions could include rerouting
bus lines to better serve
individuals with low access to
food, or linking food subsidies
with transportation subsidies.
Communities could be
encouraged to incorporate
healthy food system planning
in their required “Consolidation
Plans.” The shifting focus
towards regional
comprehensive planning efforts
further highlights the
opportunity for crossjurisdictional approaches to
food policy. The more that
food is acknowledged as
interconnected with these
systems, the more apparent
solutions can become.
5) Improve relationships
across sectors and create
interdisciplinary teams
Public, private, and nonprofit
organizations all have a place
in the food system, and uniting
these different sectors can
address food issues through a
strong, collaborative approach.
The Pittsburgh region is rich
with philanthropic generosity,
academic institutions, and
nonprofit organizations. These
organizations are great
resources to leverage support
and help fuel food system
reform. The private sector can
be utilized in food policy
implementation. Large private
companies often have
philanthropic departments or
community development
subsidiaries that can provide
financial support for regional
programs. Engaging the health
sector in food issues is another
way to tackle common
problems with an
interdisciplinary task force.
Individually, each of these
sectors have each had an
impact on the food system, but
bringing the various
stakeholders together has the
potential to foster learning,
minimize duplicate efforts and
tackle food issues with a
collective regional voice.
Micro-level
Strategies
Micro-level strategies typically
address specific problems or
parts of the food cycle on a
smaller scale. These strategies
sometimes lack a system-wide
perspective but are
advantageous in their ability to
accomplish short-term goals
and address urgent problems.
A variety of stakeholders, from
community members to policy
makers, can and do pursue
micro-level reform. The
following section provides a
brief overview of ways to
address problems within each
stage of the food cycle.
Production
Enhancing food production in
urban areas and bridging the
gap between regional farmers
and consumers are important
parts of making a region more
sustainable.
Expand Community Gardens
Not only do community
gardens provide a source for
local food, they help to
improve blighted
neighborhoods by adding
green space. They also
5
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
provide community members
with hands-on opportunities to
learn about responsible
growing and eating practices.
Where there is vacant land,
there is opportunity;
partnerships with businesses
and property owners are ways
to better utilize vacant spaces.
While urban Brownfields are
not always suitable for
agriculture, they can be
utilized for other forms of
green development like solar
energy or greenhouses that
might otherwise be located on
farmland. This preserves the
status of existing farmland
while also allowing urban
areas to indirectly contribute to
the production of food.
maintaining the primary
agricultural use.”xviii
Encouraging individuals to start
their own gardens is another
way to make households more
food secure. Organizations
like Grow Pittsburgh provide
educational and support
resources to help individuals
and communities start and
maintain food gardens.
While food safety regulations
are necessary, changing
requirements place a heavy
burden on small-scale
producers. Local governments
should work with health
departments to ensure that
these regulations do not drive
small-scale producers out of
business.xx In addition, the
USDA’s Risk Management
Agency is funding the
development of food safety
tools that will help local
producers meet institutional
food safety requirements.
Reduce Barriers for Small-scale
Farms
Many regions across the
country have started to revise
zoning regulations that create
barriers to urban agriculture.
“Tools include right-to-farm
ordinances, effective
agricultural zoning, growth
boundaries aligned with water
and sewer service areas, ‘rural
business’ zones, and zoning
ordinances that allow nonfarm
businesses on a property while
Preserve Existing Farmland
To make regions truly
sustainable, farming must be a
part of the local economy.
Agriculture conservation
easements set aside and
protect land from future
development while maintaining
farmland potential. Not only
do these easements protect
outlets for sourcing local food,
they maintain green space and
provide income for farmers by
decreasing taxes on
farmland.xix
Simplify Health and Food
Safety Regulations
Distribution
Connect Local Producers
and Consumers
As more people become
interested in buying local food,
more efforts should be made
to facilitate relationships
between local farmers and the
commercial retail and
wholesale sectors.
Farmers’ Markets
Farmers’ markets are a great
way to keep consumption local.
Unfortunately, farmers’
markets are not accessible to
everyone. The US
government’s Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP), formerly called Food
Stamps, provides qualified
individuals with an Electronic
Benefit Transfer Card (EBT),
which can be used much like a
debit card. Since many
farmers’ markets accept only
cash, individuals receiving
government support for food
are unable to access these
markets. The US Department
of Agriculture (USDA) provides
resources to help farmers
obtain EBT systems that will
enable them to sell food to
individuals in programs such as
SNAP and Women Infants and
Children (WIC).
Regional Gleaning
Other programs like “Regional
Gleaning” help to keep food
local while also addressing
food insecurity. “Gleaning
programs collect ‘excess’ fruits
and vegetables from regional
producers and distribute them
to food banks, food pantries,
and other food access outlets,
distributing food that might
otherwise be waste.”xxi
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
Community Supported
Agriculture
Community Supported
Agriculture (CSA) started as a
way to help farmers and
consumers share the risks
involved with growing food,
and often require a prepaid
membership in exchange for a
set amount of food deliveries.
A mission of most CSAs,
however, is to increase local
food consumption by bridging
the gap between farmers and
consumers with the convenience
of food delivery and/or
centralized pick up points.
Some CSAs even provide
subsidized rates for lowincome individuals or target
communities in need of better
food access.
Develop Regional Food Hubs
Part of the reason local food is
often exported is due to
challenges faced by small and
mid-sized food producers.
Food Hubs address many of
these concerns by managing
the aggregation, distribution,
processing, storage and
marketing of local food. By
using innovative business
models and improving supply
chain logistics, food hubs
enable farmers to achieve
economies of scale and tap
into new markets.xxii
FOOD HUB SPOTLIGHT
Detroit Michigan was identified
as the largest city in the United
States without a grocery store
in the city limits. Because of
this, many city residents were
forced to rely on convenience
stores with higher prices and
prepackaged high-calorie
foods. In response to Detroit’s
food access problem, Eastern
Market Corporation
transformed one of the nation’s
longest operating public
markets into a food hub that
aggregates and distributes
food from the region’s smalland mid- sized farmers.
“TODAY, E ASTERN M ARKET
PROCESSES UP TO $30,000 OF
SNAP TRANSACTIONS PER
MONTH . W HAT ’S MORE , SNAP
BENEFITS REDEEMED AT E ASTERN
M ARKET ARE DOUBLED FOR EACH
PARTICIPATING HOUSEHOLD WITH
THE SUPPORT OF THE F AIR FOOD
N ETWORK, AN ORGANIZATION
THAT PROVIDES A FINANCIAL
SNAP REDEMPTIONS
THROUGH ITS DOUBLE U P F OOD
B UCKS PROGRAM .”xxiii
MATCH TO
Governments can assist in the
creation of food hub
infrastructure by “streamlining
permit processes for such
facilities, providing mini-grants
toward their creation, donating
county resources and helping
farmers establish partnerships
with community stakeholders
who can offer these
services.”xxiv
Consumption
There are many programs and
policies that have been
created to affect the
consumption of food. This brief
discusses those initiatives that
strive to affect systemic factors
relating to food consumption—
in particular, access, purchasing
power, and information
coupled with choice.
Access
Reduce costs or subsidize
development for new food
stores
Food deserts are areas with
low access to affordable
nutritious food. As awareness
and identification of these
areas has increased, programs
have been designed to create
incentives for food stores to
locate in these vulnerable
areas. One technique is to
finance the development of
food retailers. Since 2008,
Michigan stores selling fruits
and vegetables have received
tax abatements for locating in
underserved areas.
Pennsylvania’s Fresh Food
Financing Initiative provides
grants of up to $250,000 or
loans of up to $2.5 million per
store for infrastructure costs
when building supermarkets in
areas with low access to food
retailers.xxv
Help to improve existing food
stores
Another strategy is to provide
support to improve existing
food retailers. Financial
support can be used to help
small-scale retailers obtain
refrigeration needed for fresh
produce. Other ways to
encourage stores to improve
the ratio of healthy to
7
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
unhealthy foods include
changing the physical layout of
the store, or providing gift
cards at fruit and vegetable
wholesalers.xxvi A study
conducted in Baltimore
researched ways to encourage
existing stores to provide
healthy foods while also
encouraging consumers to buy
them. In addition to helping
stores provide healthier foods,
they used signs, coupons,
giveaways, and taste tests to
increase consumer awareness
of healthier foods.
Recommendations from this
study included creating a food
store rating program that could
be used to establish minimum
requirements for food retailers
in Baltimore, to provide tax
incentives for retailers selling
healthy foods in underserved
areas, and to use education
and social marketing
campaigns to promote healthy
purchasing patters.xxvii
Support alternatives to
traditional supermarkets
Supermarkets and grocery
stores are often used as a
proxy for affordable and
nutritious food, but there are
other alternatives that should
be considered as well. Food
cooperatives, urban
agriculture, farmers’ markets,
public markets, smaller
independent stores, and mobile
carts or trucks selling fruits and
vegetables are other ways to
extend healthy food access.
While some of these
alternatives are quicker to
implement, they can also be
seasonal or limited in scale and
therefore not always a longterm solution. Despite these
limitations, farmers’ markets
obtain a great deal of
unutilized potential. Promoting
existing farmers’ markets with
advertisements, helping them to
obtain EBT access, and
coordinating public transit to
make them more accessible are
all ways to broaden their
reach.
Farm Stand Projects are
another way to provide access
to local foods in places where
farmers may not go. The
Greater Pittsburgh Community
Food Bank (GPCFB) created its
Farm Stand Project to make
fresh produce more readily
available to underserved
communities. “Unlike Farmers’
Markets where the farmer
comes to the market to sell, we
[Food Bank] go to farmers and
purchase produce and then
deliver it to the farm stands.”
xxviii
Link transportation with food
access
Transportation and food access
can and should go hand in
hand. Possible transit-oriented
solutions include: locating
farmers’ markets at transit
stops, rerouting buses,
improving bike routes, offering
shuttle services to grocery
stores, and transportation
subsidies linked with food
subsidies. Some stores, large
residential developments,
employers, and joint community
ventures have offered van
services for food delivery, as
well as customer drop-off and
pick-up at food stores. Transit
Management Associations
should also be involved to
improve functionality of transit
in relation to food access.xxix
Transit-oriented development is
an increasingly popular way to
address various types of
access issues by creating
compact housing developments
with a variety of transit
options. By clustering housing
communities with basic needs
and the means to access
them—walking, biking, buses,
etc—policy makers can help
reduce barriers for community
members.xxx
Purchasing Power
Create incentives to purchase
healthy foods
In general, the cost of healthy
foods exceeds the cost of
unhealthy foods, thereby
creating a natural disincentive
for healthy food consumption.
Some initiatives have been
created to reverse this effect.
In 2008, California enacted
the Healthy Food Purchase
pilot program, which targeted
grocers in low-income areas to
increase the sale and purchase
of fresh fruits and vegetables
by making them more
affordable.xxxi
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
Wholesome Wave is a
national nonprofit organization
with similar goals. It provides
a voucher program that
doubles the value of federal
food stamps at participating
farmers’ markets. New York
has increased the number of
farmers’ markets and also
increased use by residents with
its “Health Bucks” program
which offers $2 coupons for the
purchase of fresh fruits and
vegetables.xxxii
Help people who are eligible
for government support
receive it
Many people who are eligible
for government support do not
know how to redeem their
benefits. Organizations like
Just Harvest, located in
Pittsburgh’s South Side
neighborhood, help people
apply for and receive these
benefits. Local governments
can also provide guidance on
emergency food programs
through public hotlines or other
information programs.xxxiii
Philadelphia’s Universal
Feeding Pilot demonstrated
another way to streamline
federal benefits making it
easier for those who qualify to
receive them. The program
provides free meals to all
students in schools that have a
high percentage of students
who would qualify for free or
reduced lunch. This universal
approach has been successful
in not only reducing
administrative costs, but also
increasing access to healthy
food choices for children from
low-income families or that
reside in low-income
communities.
Information and Choice
W ASHINGTON’S
2008 LEGISLATION , WHICH LINKS
FARMERS AND SCHOOLS ;
IDENTIFIES CURRICULA ;
ENACTED BILLS IS
ESTABLISHES A FRESH FRUIT AND
VEGETABLE GRANT PROGRAM ;
REQUIRES REVISION OF FOOD
Expand nutrition education
PROCUREMENT LAWS TO EASE
The ability to access healthy
food is not enough; consumers
must also be aware of
nutritional benefits. In
coordination with its Farm
Stand Projects, the Greater
Pittsburgh Community Food
Bank (GPCFB) also provides
nutrition education, cooking
demonstrations, and samplings
of recipes using local produce.
Other ways to increase
nutrition awareness include
menu-labeling legislation and
efforts to ensure nutrition
labels are understood by those
who read them.
AND AIDS OTHER SECTORS OF THE
School system solutions
Many schools have started to
recognize the need for better
food and nutrition education.
Farm to School programs help
to educate children on the
process of growing food, and
school gardens reinforce that
knowledge. Further efforts
should be made to integrate
all aspects of Farm to School
programs into a robust and
comprehensive education
program.
“SEVENTEEN STATES NOW HAVE
PURCHASING OF LOCAL FOOD ;
LOCAL FOOD ECONOMY , SUCH AS
FOOD PROCESSORS AND FOOD
BANKS .”xxxiv
In addition to these programs,
schools should ensure that
meals are in line with nutrition
standards taught in the
classroom. The School District
of Philadelphia enacted The
School Nutrition Policy Initiative
where “Standards include the
banning of soft drinks sold or
served in school, mandating
100% fruit juice, limiting sports
drinks to after-school hours,
and specifying fat, saturated
fat, sodium, and sugar content
per serving”xxxv
Research by The
Food Trust, which
helped draft the
policy, and local
academic
institutions found a
50% reduction in
the incidence of
overweight in
students at schools
impacted by the
policy.”xxxvi
SOME FORM OF STATEWIDE FARM TO-SCHOOL PROGRAM .
PERHAPS
MOST NOTABLE AMONG THE
9
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
Food marketing
Food policy initiatives also
address food marketing. The
basis for some initiatives is that
marketing for healthy and local
foods is needed to help offset
advertisements for high-calorie
foods and increase consumer
awareness of more nutritious
and sustainable food options. In
2007, lawmakers in 27 states
considered legislation to
increase sales of local food,
and 13 measures were
passed.xxxvii In addition, “buy
local” campaigns are
prevalent across the nation.
“T HE JERSEY FRESH PROGRAM OF
THE NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF
A GRICULTURE WAS ONE OF THE
FIRST LOCAL FOOD MARKETING
PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTRY .
PROGRAM EVALUATION
DEMONSTRATES THAT FOR EVERY
$1 SPENT ON THE PROGRAM ,
ANOTHER $54 OF ECONOMIC
ACTIVITY IS GENERATED.”xxxviii
Leverage public assistance to
incentivize healthy eating
Increasing the number of
outlets authorized to redeem
SNAP benefits, particularly
those outlets with affordable
nutritious food, is another way
to affect food consumption
choices.xxxix
Address “Food Swamps”
The “hyperability” of unhealthy
foods—also known as “food
swamps”—undoubtedly
contributes to toxic consumption
patterns. Options to address
these environments include:
1) zoning regulations which
limit unhealthy food stores or
prohibit the addition of new
stores,
2) taxation of unhealthy foods,
and
3) government or institutional
procurement standards to
make unhealthy foods less
accessible in cafeterias,
vending machines, or other onsite food providers.xl
Ask consumers
Because food consumption
choices have so many
contributing factors, it is
important to understand the
role that each of these factors
play. Dane County Wisconsin’s
Food Policy Council holds an
annual conference to gain
valuable insight and input from
community members. The
conference also has community
recognition for local food
leaders, and workshop sessions
on a variety of relevant
topics.xli
Food procurement
Food consumption happens on
an individual level, as well as
an institutional level.
“Organizations and entities
that regularly buy food for
meetings, events, and meals
services should establish
procurement standards and
bonus point provisions for the
purchase of nutritious, ethical,
sustainably produced,
regionally sourced, and/or
fair-trade products.”xlii
Waste
Composting
When food waste is discarded
with trash, there are
environmental and financial
costs, and the recycling
potential of food is lost. The
amount of food waste has
continued to rise over the
years, and studies have shown
that food in landfills makes a
significant contribution to
greenhouse gas emission.
Composting is a great way to
keep food waste out of
landfills—and in doing so,
reduce dumping costs borne by
municipalities. Composting as
an alternative to in-sink
garbage disposals can also
reduce energy use and the
costs of treating wastewater.
Composting turns food waste
into usable soil and can
supplement or replace
commercial fertilizers. In
1989, Vancouver passed a
resolution to reduce food
waste by 50 percent. They
started by promoting
backyard composting, and
distributed bins along with
information and workshops. In
1995, they built a 2.5 million
dollar compost facility. The
compost generated at this
facility is primarily sold in bulk
to landscapers and municipal
park boards. In 2010,
Vancouver’s yard trimming and
food waste program
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
experienced a $486, 245
surplus.xliii
to food system reform will
become clearer.
“More local governments
should adopt ‘zero waste’
strategies or increase
composting activities at all
scales, from commercial
businesses like restaurants to
curbside pick-up for
residents.”xliv Other alternatives
include distributing compost
bins, and composting education
classes.
Conducting a stakeholder
analysis, like the one conducted
by DVRPC in Philadelphia, is
another good way to assess
the existing food environment
using knowledge and
experience from regional food
experts.
ANALYSIS
There is no one-size-fits-all
solution to food cycle issues.
The issues themselves are
diverse and complex, and so
are the regions in which they
occur. Because of this, a good
first step is to conduct a food
evaluation. Important
questions to ask include:








What is currently being
done to address food
issues?
What has been done in the
past?
Who is involved?
Who should be involved?
How do food issues relate
to other regional systems?
What are the regional
strengths and assets on
which to build?
What issues are important
to residents?
What are the biggest and
most urgent problems to
address?
Once these and other questions
have been answered, the path
Micro-level strategies can help
to catalyze food reform.
Small-scale programs and
successes can create awareness
and interest in the community.
Many experts in the field
advise to reach for “lowhanging fruits” as a way of
building momentum and
sustaining interest among
stakeholders.
Choosing the right strategies to
address problems within the
food cycle requires recognizing
what the problems are, an
awareness of best practices,
and identifying who should be
involved in food reform.
Different sectors have their
own comparative advantages.
For example, governments are
a necessary actor for policyoriented solutions; academic
institutions can aid with
research; non-profit
organizations often specialize
in community-focused
programs; and for-profit
companies often have funding
sources which can support these
initiatives. It is important to
recognize the strengths of each
sector when deciding who
should be involved.
The underlying goal of macrolevel strategies is to create a
permanent place for food in
system planning. Food issues
are too important to be a hot
topic one year but not the next.
In order to build positive and
sustainable changes within the
food cycle, the food cycle itself
must be recognized as a
system that is highly integrated
with other regional systems.
Artificial boundaries should not
prevent food reform from
being comprehensive and
collaborative, nor should it
create divides between sectors.
The phases of the food cycle—
production, distribution,
consumption, and waste—are
interrelated with each other
and other regional systems. It
takes recognizing these
relationships for comprehensive
reform to take place.
Along with this theme, macrolevel strategies should not
necessarily be used in isolation.
As mentioned before, a food
assessment is a great place to
start, and the creation of a
strategic food plan is a good
way to set sustainable change
in motion. The creation or
expansion of a Food Policy
Council helps to integrate all
aspects of the food system in
one continuous discourse while
also ensuring that food issues
do not vanish from the policy
arena as political winds
change. A regional
Department of Food can
create an obvious space for
food planning in government,
11
Page
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
but perhaps a more feasible
solution is to incorporate food
system planning with existing
urban systems like
transportation and community
development. Lastly,
collaboration across sectors
creates opportunities for
leverage and learning, and
should always be encouraged
when addressing food issues.
CONCLUSION
Because the food cycle is
integrated across regional
domains, the best way to
address its problems is with a
comprehensive and
coordinated approach. The
CONNECT framework has
many of these same goals. The
food system crosses municipal,
state, and even national
borders and so should its task
force.
There are two overarching
ways to address food
problems: with macro-level
strategies, and with micro-level
initiatives. Macro-level
strategies provide a vehicle for
change and prepare regions
for reform that is both
comprehensive and
sustainable. Micro-level
initiatives fuel reform by
generating interest and
addressing specific (and
sometimes urgent) problems.
When these strategies are
used separately, food reform
can become stagnant or
directionless. Together,
however, they foster solutions
that are comprehensive and
driven.
The significance of food issues
for the urban core should not
be underestimated. Urban
residents, like all residents,
need food and could be at
greatest risk in times of food
crises. Only the urban core
that ensures these basic needs
can be truly sustainable, and
intergovernmental groups like
CONNECT can help to
complete the food cycle.
It is important not to duplicate
existing efforts, but rather
expand and strengthen them
with a collective voice. There
must be a platform for
interdisciplinary dialogue, and
the urban core has the ability
to create this space.
SOURCES
CONSULTED
i
Pothukuchi, K., Kaufman, J.
(1999).Placing the food system on
the urban agenda: The role of
municipal institutions in food
systems planning. Agriculture and
Human Values. 16: 213-224.
ii
Miller, D. (in press). PostIndustrial defining of the urban
core: A city and its contiguous
municipalities. University of
Pittsburgh, Center for
Metropolitan Studies.
iii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Jan 2010),
19. Greater Philadelphia food
system study. Retrieved from
http://www.dvrpc.org/reports/090
66A.pdf
iv
O’Driscoll, B. (2007, October 11).
A tough row to hoe; Four
beginning organic farmers plow
through, plant, and harvest their
first season in Natrona Heights.
Pittsburgh City Paper. Retrieved
from
http://www.pittsburghcitypaper.w
s/pittsburgh/a-tough-row-tohoe/Content?oid=1339182
v
RUDD Center for Food Policy and
Obesity. (2008). Access to healthy
foods in low income
neighborhoods; opportunities for
public policy. (6). Retrieved from
http://www.yaleruddcenter.org/re
sources/upload/docs/what/reports
/RuddReportAccesstoHealthyFood
s2008.pdf
vi
Ibid.
vii
United States Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. (2009).Access to
affordable and nutritious food;
Measuring and understanding food
deserts and their consequences.
(52). Retrieved from
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publicati
ons/AP/AP036/AP036.pdf52.
viii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Feb 2011).
Eating here: Greater Philadelphia’s
food system plan. (Publication
number 10063), 40.
ix
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (April 2010),
1. Food system planning; Municipal
Implementation Tool #18.
Retrieved from
http://www.atlantaregional.com/F
ile%20Library/About%20Us/commi
ttee%20agendas/LUCC/lu_lucc_dvr
pc_food_system_planning_tool.pd
f
x
Harper, A., Shattuck, A., HoltGimenez E., Alkon, A., Lambrick, F.
(2009). Food policy councils:
Lessons learned. Retrieved from
http://www.foodfirst.org/files/pdf
/Food%20Policy%20Councils%20R
eport%20small.pdf
CONNECTing the food cycle in the urban core
xi
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Feb 2011),
84.
xii
Pothukuchi, K. (2004).
Community food assessment: A
first step in planning for
community food security. Journal
of Planning Education and
Research. 23:356-377.
xiii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (April 2010),
3.
xiv
Ibid, 3.
xv
Ibid.
xvi
Pothukuchi, K., Kaufman, J.
(1999).
xvii
Pothukuchi, K. (2004), 220.
xviii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Jan 2010),
33.
xix
National Association of Counties.
(2007). Counties and local food
systems; Ensuring healthy foods,
nurturing healthy children.
Retrieved from
http://www.farmtoschool.org/files
/publications_133.pdf
xx
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission, (2011).
xxi
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Jan. 2010),
66.
xxii
United States Department of
Agriculture. (June 20, 2011). Food
hubs: Building stronger
infrastructure for small and midsized producers. Retrieved from
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.
0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?tem
plate=TemplateA&navID=FoodHub
sLinkWFMHome&rightNav1=Food
HubsLinkWFMHome&topNav=&lef
tNav=WholesaleandFarmersMarke
ts&page=FoodHubsandOtherMark
etAccessStrategies&resultType=&a
cct=frmrdirmkt
xxiii
Tropp, Debbie. (2010). Detroit’s
Eastern
Market; A food hub in a food
desert. Retrieved from
http://kyf.blogs.usda.gov/category
/regional-food-hub/
xxiv
National Association of
Counties. (2007), 14.
xxv
United States Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, (2009).
xxvi
Ibid.
xxvii
Center for a Livable Future,
John Hopkins School of Public
Health. (2010). The Baltimore City
food environment. Retrieved from
http://www.jhsph.edu/clf/PDF_Fil
es/BaltimoreCityFoodEnvironment.
pdf
xxviii
Greater Pittsburgh Community
Food Bank. (March 2012). Farm
Stand Project. Retrieved from
http://www.pittsburghfoodbank.or
g/programs/farmstandproject.aspx
xxix
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission, (2011).
xxx
Winterfeld, A., Shinkle, D.,
Morandi, L. (2009). Promoting
healthy communities and reducing
childhood obesity; Legislative
options. Retrieved from
http://www.policyarchive.org/hadl
e/10207/bitstreams/21323.pdf
xxxi
Ibid, 43
xxxii
United States Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. (2009).
xxxiii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (April 2010)
xxxiv
Winterfeld, A., Shinkle, D.,
Morandi, L.(2009), 39.
xxxv
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Feb 2011),
58-59.
xxxvi
Ibid, 58-59
xxxvii
Winterfeld, A., Shinkle, D.,
Morandi, L. (2009).
xxxviii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Feb 2011),
47.
xxxix
Ibid.
xl
Ibid.
xli
National Association of Counties
(2007).
xlii
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (2011), 46.
xliii
City of Vancouver, Solid Waste
Management Branch. (2010).
Solid waste division report.
Retrieved from
http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/solid
waste/documents/SWSummaryRp
2010.pdf
xliv
Delaware Valley Regional
Planning Commission. (Feb 2011),
40.
13
Page